Spectrum-Based Fault Localization in Model Transformations

Model transformations play a cornerstone role in Model-Driven Engineering (MDE), as they provide the essential mechanisms for manipulating and transforming models. The correctness of software built using MDE techniques greatly relies on the correctness of model transformations. However, it is challenging and error prone to debug them, and the situation gets more critical as the size and complexity of model transformations grow, where manual debugging is no longer possible. Spectrum-Based Fault Localization (SBFL) uses the results of test cases and their corresponding code coverage information to estimate the likelihood of each program component (e.g., statements) of being faulty. In this article we present an approach to apply SBFL for locating the faulty rules in model transformations. We evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of the approach by comparing the effectiveness of 18 different stateof- the-art SBFL techniques at locating faults in model transformations. Evaluation results revealed that the best techniques, namely Kulcynski2, Mountford, Ochiai, and Zoltar, lead the debugger to inspect a maximum of three rules to locate the bug in around 74% of the cases. Furthermore, we compare our approach with a static approach for fault localization in model transformations, observing a clear superiority of the proposed SBFL-based method.Comisión Interministerial de Ciencia y Tecnología TIN2015-70560-RJunta de Andalucía P12-TIC-186

The problems of assessing software reliability ...When you really need to depend on it

This paper looks at the ways in which the reliability of software can be assessed and predicted. It shows that the levels of reliability that can be claimed with scientific justification are relatively modest

Evaluating testing methods by delivered reliability

There are two main goals in testing software: (1) to achieve adequate quality (debug testing), where the objective is to probe the software for defects so that these can be removed, and (2) to assess existing quality (operational testing), where the objective is to gain confidence that the software is reliable. Debug methods tend to ignore random selection of test data from an operational profile, while for operational methods this selection is all-important. Debug methods are thought to be good at uncovering defects so that these can be repaired, but having done so they do not provide a technically defensible assessment of the reliability that results. On the other hand, operational methods provide accurate assessment, but may not be as useful for achieving reliability. This paper examines the relationship between the two testing goals, using a probabilistic analysis. We define simple models of programs and their testing, and try to answer the question of how to attain program reliability: is it better to test by probing for defects as in debug testing, or to assess reliability directly as in operational testing? Testing methods are compared in a model where program failures are detected and the software changed to eliminate them. The “better” method delivers higher reliability after all test failures have been eliminated. Special cases are exhibited in which each kind of testing is superior. An analysis of the distribution of the delivered reliability indicates that even simple models have unusual statistical properties, suggesting caution in interpreting theoretical comparisons

Learning Tractable Probabilistic Models for Fault Localization

In recent years, several probabilistic techniques have been applied to various debugging problems. However, most existing probabilistic debugging systems use relatively simple statistical models, and fail to generalize across multiple programs. In this work, we propose Tractable Fault Localization Models (TFLMs) that can be learned from data, and probabilistically infer the location of the bug. While most previous statistical debugging methods generalize over many executions of a single program, TFLMs are trained on a corpus of previously seen buggy programs, and learn to identify recurring patterns of bugs. Widely-used fault localization techniques such as TARANTULA evaluate the suspiciousness of each line in isolation; in contrast, a TFLM defines a joint probability distribution over buggy indicator variables for each line. Joint distributions with rich dependency structure are often computationally intractable; TFLMs avoid this by exploiting recent developments in tractable probabilistic models (specifically, Relational SPNs). Further, TFLMs can incorporate additional sources of information, including coverage-based features such as TARANTULA. We evaluate the fault localization performance of TFLMs that include TARANTULA scores as features in the probabilistic model. Our study shows that the learned TFLMs isolate bugs more effectively than previous statistical methods or using TARANTULA directly.Comment: Fifth International Workshop on Statistical Relational AI (StaR-AI 2015